Hamas Full Control Of Gaza!

[wilberhum]

Yeah i know Wilber, i can tell from your sig. Anyway I know Hamas have made statements like this and this has not helped them in anyway. But i still think the cycle of violence will only be ended when occupation ends.

You miss logic. :skeleton: The violence did not start with the occupation. Violence caused the occupation.
Eliminating the occupation will not eliminate violence. :?


And what does my signature have to do with any of this? :enough!:

[Amadeus85]

I think you need to realistic, Hamas have said tons of time that they will stop when the occupation stops. What is so simple, stop the occupation than there will be better chance of peace in Palestine.

I think that you need to be realistic. Hamas doesnt want peace, it wants to destroy Israel. Hamas said it many times. Hamas wants to build an islamic state in the whole historical Palestinian land. What do you mean by ending the occupation? You mean pushing Jews to the sea or what? For Hamas the occupation wont stop untill Israel exists. So i ask, how can Israel treat this organization as reasonable partner to talk about peace?
The truth is that Israel is there to stay. Arabs tried so many times to destroy Israel, but it still exists.
After 60 years of war, Israel has dozens of satelites in space, and what Palestinians have created? Kassam rockets only i guess.
The truth is that Arabs must realize that sending back Jews to Europe or to Madagascar is just a fantasy and illussion.
The truth is Israel, just, as any normal democratic country, wont allowed others to be destroyed.
Arabs have two solutions.
They can try and try to destroy Israel and suffer from war and conflict all the time.
And they can recognize Israel and let build independent and democratic Palestinian state.

[SATalha]

You miss logic. :skeleton: The violence did not start with the occupation. Violence caused the occupation.
Eliminating the occupation will not eliminate violence. :?


And what does my signature have to do with any of this? :enough!:

Iam sory dude, man take a chIll pill. I swear i read on one of ur sigs sumin about peace. Sorry must b my old age (21 what can u do) how did the violence start? Oh thats a whole other matter.

[wilberhum]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAMAS

Hamas was created in 1987 by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin of the Gaza wing of the Muslim Brotherhood at the beginning of the First Intifada. It is best known outside the West Bank and Gaza Strip for its suicide bombings and other attacks directed against civilians and Israeli military and security forces targets. Hamas' charter (written in 1988 and still in effect) calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and its replacement with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip.
Its charter states: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.

Suicide bombings and other attacks directed against civilians
Calls for the destruction of the State of Israel
There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad.
Is that a peace partner?

Hamas announced it was giving up suicide attacks and "offered a 10-year truce [with Israel] in return for a complete Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Palestinian territories: the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem

A 10-year truce is not a peace plan.
It is a rearmament plan.
As seen below:

Hamas also declared a unilateral ceasefire with Israel which, after Israeli air strikes in response to Hamas smuggling weapons into Gaza, was formally renounced.

Reality sucks; Hamas has no interest in peace.
By that same token, I don’t think Israel wants peace either.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[wilberhum]

Iam sory dude, man take a chIll pill. I swear i read on one of ur sigs sumin about peace. Sorry must b my old age (21 what can u do) how did the violence start? Oh thats a whole other matter.

Old age at 21? You will be in sad shape when you are 61. :skeleton:

How did it start? Depends where you want to start. 1947, 1948,...., 2007?
Depending on where you start will determind the answer.

But since we don't get "Do Overs" in life, I care a lot more about the end than I do about the beginning. :thumbs_up

[SATalha]

Wow 61 thats fantastic! Your right if i go into a debate on how the violence startd, it will just drag. But i strongly recomend people to read up.

[sudais1]

You miss logic. :skeleton: The violence did not start with the occupation. Violence caused the occupation.
Eliminating the occupation will not eliminate violence. :?

That makes no apparent Sense, The British mandate of Palestine gave Israeli lands that belong to Palestine and once the Palestinians wanted Their land back they were brutally crushed by Israeli and their allies. Palestine will see peace once the occupation is over, Israel leave equals peace. Simple? Leave and peace is restored.

[wilberhum]

That makes no apparent Sense, The British mandate of Palestine gave Israeli lands that belong to Palestine and once the Palestinians wanted Their land back they were brutally crushed by Israeli and their allies. Palestine will see peace once the occupation is over, Israel leave equals peace. Simple? Leave and peace is restored.

Right all of Israel are going to get on the next ship. :skeleton:
Meanwhile back in reality land, people just keep killing each other. :raging:

[barney]

Guys, can we please discuss this without saying that we want to kill each other?

Thats What the UN have being saying for 60 years mate. :rollseyes

If you manage to get a peace settlement on the forum, then get yerself a job with them! :D

[Skywalker]

I think that you need to be realistic. Hamas doesnt want peace, it wants to destroy Israel. Hamas said it many times. Hamas wants to build an islamic state in the whole historical Palestinian land. What do you mean by ending the occupation? You mean pushing Jews to the sea or what? For Hamas the occupation wont stop untill Israel exists. So i ask, how can Israel treat this organization as reasonable partner to talk about peace?
The truth is that Israel is there to stay. Arabs tried so many times to destroy Israel, but it still exists.

I think that what they mean by the destruction of Israel is not forcing the Jewish people out, but forcing their government out and giving the Palestinians their land back, or compensating them somehow. And the reason Arabs haven't been able to take down Israel is because Israel is directly backed by the US and the Arabs are indirectly controlled by the US. So if the US agenda is to keep Israel where it is, most likely it'll stay that way.

After 60 years of war, Israel has dozens of satelites in space, and what Palestinians have created? Kassam rockets only i guess.

Is that really a fair statement? Look at what Israel had to work with and then look at Palestine.

Arabs have two solutions.
They can try to destroy Israel and suffer from war and conflict all the time.
And they can recognize Israel and let build independent and democratic Palestinian state.

Or they can be smart do both. Temporarily recognize Israel for a decade or two until they're strong economically, have good alliances with the Arabs, and actually taste peace for a while, and then take over Israel when they actually have the physical capability to do so. But until that time, don't fire one rocket or send out a single suicide bomber (and hopefully someone will tell them one day that suicide is haraam). To me, that's playing it smart.

[Cognescenti]

I think that what they mean by the destruction of Israel is not forcing the Jewish people out, but forcing their government out and giving the Palestinians their land back, or compensating them somehow. And the reason Arabs haven't been able to take down Israel is because Israel is directly backed by the US and the Arabs are indirectly controlled by the US. So if the US agenda is to keep Israel where it is, most likely it'll stay that way.

I still don't understand. Are you saying that the state of Israel would still exist
but it would populated by a majority of Palestinians and everything would be OK? :rollseyes Are you saying you want a Netanyahu led government? :?

Then there is this: ..."And the reason Arabs haven't been able to take down Israel is because Israel is directly backed by the US.... "

That is bunk. In 48 the Israelis fought with ancient rifles. In 56 and 67 the Israelis had no top of the line US equipment. In 67, their air force's most sophisticated planes were French. In 73, they had a few old F4 Phantoms which the US had been using for many years but they were up against the best SAM's the Russians could ship to Egypt (in some cases even manned by Russians). The Syrians had the best Russian tanks. The Jordanians had top of the line British tanks.

I am sorry to tell you, but the painful truth is the IDF were better trained, better led, better educated, much more highly motivated (the threat of extermination tends to do that) more courageous and just plain better fighters. I realize that may be difficult to hear, but it is true. Your notion that Arab governments are "indirectly controlled" by the US is good for a laugh. The Egyptians are under the infuence of the US now (because they take US money) but that sure as Hell wasn't true for Nasser or for Sadat prior to 73. When exactly, was Syria ever controlled by the US???

[Skywalker]

I still don't understand. Are you saying that the state of Israel would still exist but it would populated by a majority of Palestinians and everything would be OK? Are you saying you want a Netanyahu led government?

Well think about it, what else could they mean by "destruction of Israel?" Do you think they mean the massacre or deportation of the entire Israeli population? How practical is that? Obviously the Jews would have the right to stay where they are if they want to, while at the same time arranging a compromise for the displaced Palestinians.

That is bunk.

Really? How much money does Israel receive from the US yearly? Also, who gave them their tanks in the 1967 war? Finally, where did they get their nuclear weapons from?

[Cognescenti]

Well think about it, what else could they mean by "destruction of Israel?" Do you think they mean the massacre or deportation of the entire Israeli population? How practical is that? Obviously the Jews would have the right to stay where they are if they want to, while at the same time arranging a compromise for the displaced Palestinians.

So the Jews lucky enough to still be alive but foolish enough to stay would be living under a Palestinian "occupation"? Is there any doubt why the fight so hard?

Really? How much money does Israel receive from the US yearly?

About 68 M$ annually in loans (95%) and grants through 1966. The figure for 1966 was a bit higher (100 M). All the loans have been paid back, btw. :)

You might also ask yourself where the Egyptians got the money to buy 420 Russian aircraft (including several hundred MiG-21's), 900 tanks (including some of their latest) and 1000 artillery pieces. Do you think that was funded with camel rides at the Pyramids??

Also, who gave them their tanks in the 1967 war? Finally, where did they get their nuclear weapons from?

I'm not sure anybody "gave" them tanks. :) Most of their tanks were refurbished Sherman tanks from WWII, which, although of original US manufacture 25 years earlier, they could have bought for junk from a least a dozen European countries, light French anti-tank vehicles which, I am quite certain, they did not get from the US, and perhaps 40 M-48 tanks of US design which they bought second hand from Germany. The M-48 was being retired from NATO service. The Israelis were refurbishing them and most were not ready for the 67 war.

Want to see a list of IDF planes in 67?

45 Fouga Magister trainer jets that were used as attack planes, 50 Ouragan bombers, 20 Vatour light bombers, and 35 Mystere Mark IV fighters, 35 Super Mystere and 65 Mirage IIIc fighters

Where do you think they came from? Hmmm?

The nukes they made themselves. I believe the nuclear power plant they used to produce plutonium was....wait for it......of French manufacture. :)

Anything else you want to know?

[wilberhum]

Temporarily recognize Israel for a decade or two until they're strong economically, have good alliances with the Arabs, and actually taste peace for a while, and then take over Israel when they actually have the physical capability to do so.

No one wants peace. :raging:

But no one sees that as a problem. :skeleton:

[Trumble]

Or they can be smart do both. Temporarily recognize Israel for a decade or two until they're strong economically, have good alliances with the Arabs, and actually taste peace for a while, and then take over Israel when they actually have the physical capability to do so. But until that time, don't fire one rocket or send out a single suicide bomber (and hopefully someone will tell them one day that suicide is haraam). To me, that's playing it smart.

If you think 'tasting peace' and then throwing it away is 'smart', I'd hate to see your definition of stupid. Fortunately, in the real world things don't work like that. The non-idiot element, having tasted peace, is likely to jail anyone who wants to start the whole thing up again, not follow them into war. And you think they could gain 'the physical capacity to take over Israel' without the Israelis noticing and doing something about it? Utter tosh.

The nukes they made themselves. I believe the nuclear power plant they used to produce plutonium was....wait for it......of French manufacture. :)

Yup. The Americans didn't even know about it until a U2 happened to fly over it. They weren't happy.

[barney]

45 Fouga Magister trainer jets that were used as attack planes, 50 Ouragan bombers, 20 Vatour light bombers, and 35 Mystere Mark IV fighters, 35 Super Mystere and 65 Mirage IIIc fighters

Where do you think they came from? Hmmm?

The nukes they made themselves. I believe the nuclear power plant they used to produce plutonium was....wait for it......of French manufacture. :)

Anything else you want to know?

FN-FAL rifles (belgian) FN-MAG GPMG (Belgium) UZI SMG (Home-produced)

[Zman]

:sl:/Peace To All

Rice Calls Hamas 'Resistance Movement'

Rice Calls Hamas 'Resistance Movement' But Unscripted Remarks Not Published By Paper

By Aaron Klein
Posted: June 26, 2007
72:17 P.M. Eastern
WorldNetDaily

JERUSALEM – U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice twice referred to Hamas as a "resistance movement" during a meeting with reporters from the New York Daily News earlier this month, but the newspaper did not report her remarks, WND has learned.

Rice's interview is transcribed in full on the State Department website.

Rice's statements mark the second documented time in recent months she called Hamas a "resistance movement" during unscripted chats with journalists....During the interview June 8 with the editorial board of the Daily News, Rice was asked about the recent history of democratic elections in the Middle East and the rise to power of...Hamas.

Rice told the paper it was "very interesting to see Hamas trying to come to terms with no longer being really a resistance movement, but having to deal with politics."

Rice then referred to Hamas as a resistance movement a second time during the interview.

"A moderate Palestinian friend of mine said, 'You know, they (Hamas) used to be the great resistance, running the streets with their faces covered and going after Israel. And now, they look like a bunch of politicians who also can't make the sewer system work.'"

She went on to reference Hamas' terror cells, calling them the group's "military wing..."

"And they're (Hamas) clearly uncomfortable in that framework, which is part of why I think you see the military wing of Hamas trying to make this again about Israel and the Palestinians, not about the contestation of politics inside the Palestinian territories," Rice said.

Rice's remarks were not challenged by the Daily News editors.

Much of the interview was conducted by Daily News Chairman Mort Zuckerman, who is also a prominent Jewish leader.

Reached for comment, Zuckerman told WND, "The U S government officially refers to Hamas as a terrorist organization, and I can't imagine that isn't her policy as well."

A State Department spokesman could not explain why Rice called Hamas a "resistance movement."

The spokesman confirmed the State Department had not changed its policy of classifying Hamas as a terror organization.

Rice's Daily News interview was the second recorded time in recent months she called Hamas a "resistance movement."

WND reported Rice, speaking to reporters in Berlin Jan. 18 about the situation of Palestinians prior to 2000, commented, "You had Hamas, of course, sitting out as a resistance movement, not at all, by the way, involved in the politics at all."

Source:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=56384

[wilberhum]

But who lacks the intelligence to realize that “Resistance” and “Terrorism” are not mutually exclusive?

[Cognescenti]

FN-FAL rifles (belgian) FN-MAG GPMG (Belgium) UZI SMG (Home-produced)

<sounds of crickets chirping>

[Zman]

But who lacks the intelligence to realize that “Resistance” and “Terrorism” are not mutually exclusive?

Neither are state organized warfare & terrorism...

[Skywalker]

So the Jews lucky enough to still be alive but foolish enough to stay would be living under a Palestinian "occupation"? Is there any doubt why the fight so hard?

It wouldn't be an occupation, they would be given equal rights as citizens, something Israel could never do for the Palestinians. They could even make a joint government that evaluates and asesses the needs and demands of both the Palestinian and Jewish citizens.

About 68 M$ annually in loans (95&#37;) and grants through 1966. The figure for 1966 was a bit higher (100 M). All the loans have been paid back, btw.

That's a joke, right?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...o_Israel1.html

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

You might wanna read this too and get *enlightened* :)

You might also ask yourself where the Egyptians got the money to buy 420 Russian aircraft (including several hundred MiG-21's), 900 tanks (including some of their latest) and 1000 artillery pieces. Do you think that was funded with camel rides at the Pyramids??

No, actually I'd say it's from boat rides through the Suez Canal :)

The nukes they made themselves. I believe the nuclear power plant they used to produce plutonium was....wait for it......of French manufacture.

And the US didn't try to stop them like they're doing now with...wait for it...Iran. Heck, I'd say Israel was more of a threat to the stability of the region then than any county ever was in the history of the Earth.

Anything else you want to know?

Yeah, where do you get your facts from?? :X

[Cognescenti]

It wouldn't be an occupation, they would be given equal rights as citizens, something Israel could never do for the Palestinians. They could even make a joint government that evaluates and asesses the needs and demands of both the Palestinian and Jewish citizens.

Yes, but this is the real world :) The Palestinians can't administer Gaza without slaughtering each other. Can you imagine what the cabinet meetings would be like with a joint Jewish/Arab administartion of the Holy Land. :D

Something like the model you suggest would be needed to administer Jerusalem but I am beginning to despair of ever getting to that point.

That's a joke, right?

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...o_Israel1.html

http://www.wrmea.com/html/us_aid_to_israel.htm

You might wanna read this too and get *enlightened* :)

Ummm, no. It's not a joke. You asked about the '67 war and how much US support Israel was getting and I cited exactly those figures in your first source.

Yr.....(Total US support loan and grant)
1949 100.0
1950
1951 35.1
1952 86.4
1953 73.6
1954 74.7
1955 52.7
1956 50.8
1957 40.9
1958 85.4
1959 53.3
1960 56.2
1961 77.9
1962 93.4
1963 87.9
1964 37.0
1965 65.1
1966 126.8

No, actually I'd say it's from boat rides through the Suez Canal :)

Apparently quite a profitable enterprise :)

And the US didn't try to stop them like they're doing now with...wait for it...Iran. Heck, I'd say Israel was more of a threat to the stability of the region then than any county ever was in the history of the Earth.

USS Liberty aside, I don't think most Americans are too worried about Israeli nukes. Of course, if I were Assad, I might think about it from time to time should I have a wild idea to take back the Golan.

1) I beleive Israel was not a signatory to the NPT (or it didn't even exist at the time). There were no IAEA inspectors.

2) The French did not ask our permission..neither did the Israelis :)

3) Satellite recon was not as advanced as it is now.

Yeah, where do you get your facts from?? :X

Curiously from one the same exact sources you did. I do note the withdrawal of your claim the US armed Israel prior to the 67 war :)

[wilberhum]

Hamas critical of Blair envoy role
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...5328060A35.htm

Hamas has condemned the appointment of Tony Blair as Middle East envoy.

"Blair, who supported the American occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan, may not be a man of peace," Fawzi Barhum, the Hamas spokesman told AFP in Gaza.

Boy, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Like Hamas is on a peace mission.

The article does not mention who Hamas thinks would be acceptable.
I doubt that they would find anyone less than Adolf acceptable.

[Trumble]

Blair's appointment is smart, IMHO. It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference who got the job as far as persuading Hamas to do anything, but one thing Blair just might be able to do (that nobody Hamas liked ever would) is persuade the Israelis to give some ground.

[Keltoi]

Blair's appointment is smart, IMHO. It wouldn't make a blind bit of difference who got the job as far as persuading Hamas to do anything, but one thing Blair just might be able to do (that nobody Hamas liked ever would) is persuade the Israelis to give some ground.

Good point. I think the "quartet" chose Blair for that very reason. A person who has credibility with Israel is just as important as someone with credibility with whatever Palestinian entity has control.

[Cognescenti]

The best short term hope for peace in the Holy Land was felled by a brain hemorrhage. What the peace process really needs is a doctor (or perhaps God) to revive Sharon. He had such a hard-liner credentials that he was able to push his own party. The best example is the Israeli withdrawl from Gaza.

Netanyahu would have similar street cred, but he would first need to win and he would need space from the Hamas nutjobs to get anything done.

[mariam.]

Somehow I don't think it was quite that humanitarian...you don't bring up the "Elders of Zion" to foster understanding. Maybe I missed something.

actually, I don't understand what wrong with bringing up the "Elders of Zion" .. maybe this book is exaggerated but there is no smoke without fire.

I am not an Anti-semitic .. or Anti-Jews. but, Iam an Anti- zionism.
you have to understand that the zionism use the religion to them personal interest.

[wilberhum]

I don't understand what wrong with bringing up the "Elders of Zion"

Because it has been proven to be a fabricated lie to inspire Jewish hatred.

[Cognescenti]

Because it has been proven to be a fabricated lie to inspire Jewish hatred.

True, there is that, but I think she means what's wrong with it besides that?

[Zman]

:sl:/Peace To All

Abbas Advisor Ssays Hamas Fighting Collaborators

Hani al-Hassan, Senior Presidential Advisor Says Gaza War Was Between Hamas and Fatah Collaborators Who Aided Israel, US.

Gunshots Fired At Al-Hassan's Home Following Statements, Abbas Dismisses Him From His Role

By Ali Waked
06.28.07
Ynet

The Gaza events were not a war between Fatah and Hamas; but between Hamas and Fatah collaborators who served the Americans and the Israelis, said a senior Fatah advisor on Wednesday.

Hani al-Hassan, the Palestinian president's senior political advisor and member of Fatah's central committee said in a TV interview that what was happening in the Gaza Strip was the defeat of to plans of American Major General Keith Dayton and his Fatah followers.

Al-Hassan's words severely discredit Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and other Arab leaders' claims that the Gaza takeover was a coup against Palestinian democracy.

By making such statements the presidential advisor supports Hamas' claims that the war was between a small group of Fatah men who served Israel and the United States.

Following the interview, which put a dent in Fatah's PR efforts, Fatah gunmen fired at al-Hassan's home. No one was injured, as al-Hassan was abroad for the interview.

Senior Fatah bodies demanded al-Hassan be dismissed from all his duties, but Abbas settled for firing him only from his post as senior political advisor...

Source:
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/Art...418486,00.html

[wilberhum]

Standard denial of responsibility. :skeleton:

[Trumble]

actually, I don't understand what wrong with bringing up the "Elders of Zion" .. maybe this book is exaggerated but there is no smoke without fire.

It is not 'exaggerated', it is a total fabrication, exposed as early as the 1920s. It was written (possibly with co-authors) by a Russian-French journalist and part-time Russian spook named Matvei Golovinski. Your use of the word 'exaggerated' suggests you have no idea what the book is. It was claimed to be an instruction manual for new members of the "elders" and is not some sort of commentary. It could not be 'exaggerated', only 'genuine' or 'fake'. It is fake.

The only use for the 'Protocols' is as anti-semetic propaganda (it was a Nazi favourite) to fool the gullible; a group which, sadly, seems to include you. The only 'fire' is rabid anti-semitism and all that pimping the 'smoke' does is support that cause.

[Skywalker]

Yes, but this is the real world :) The Palestinians can't administer Gaza without slaughtering each other. Can you imagine what the cabinet meetings would be like with a joint Jewish/Arab administartion of the Holy Land. :D

Something like the model you suggest would be needed to administer Jerusalem but I am beginning to despair of ever getting to that point.

The Palestinians couldn't do it as they are now, but if the Palestinian people are happy and are no longer in a state of war, it would automatically become easier to govern the Holy Land and make more rational decisions.

Ummm, no. It's not a joke. You asked about the '67 war and how much US support Israel was getting and I cited exactly those figures in your first source.

Actually I wasn't referring to the money they received pre-67, which was a very, very significant sum at that time by the way, but to the money they're receiving now, which as you can see goes into the billions of dollars, most of which have been grants since 1974. Israel paid back their loans, huh? Kinda hard not to pay them when they're getting all this money for free.

Apparently quite a profitable enterprise :)

It is indeed...

USS Liberty aside, I don't think most Americans are too worried about Israeli nukes. Of course, if I were Assad, I might think about it from time to time should I have a wild idea to take back the Golan.

1) I beleive Israel was not a signatory to the NPT (or it didn't even exist at the time). There were no IAEA inspectors.

2) The French did not ask our permission..neither did the Israelis :)

3) Satellite recon was not as advanced as it is now.

And Americans should be afraid of Iranian nukes? How does that work? Secondly, America's been the world's superpower for the better part of the 20th century. If they didn't want someone to have nuclear capabilities, they could've stopped them. But in the case of Israel, they didn't. And just how plausible is it to say that "well they just didn't know they had them"?

With all due respect, to say that the US is not backing Israel is ludicrous. It's not just the US however, although they are the major player.

[wilberhum]

if the Palestinian people are happy and are no longer in a state of war, it would automatically become easier to govern the Holy Land and make more rational decisions.

Automatically? :skeleton: You have to be walking in the sky to see logic here. :?

[SATalha]

Just a quick question have any of you guys seen "occupation 101"?

[Skywalker]

Automatically? :skeleton: You have to be walking in the sky to see logic here. :?

Good thing I am then :)
However, the logic stands nevertheless. Do you think it's easier to make rational decisions while at war and your people are starving or when your country is at peace and your people are happy? I think anyone would *automatically* choose the latter...

[wilberhum]

Good thing I am then :)
However, the logic stands nevertheless. Do you think it's easier to make rational decisions while at war and your people are starving or when your country is at peace and your people are happy? I think anyone would *automatically* choose the latter...

It would be easier. But I doubt that it would be done.

Stopping 60 years of war does not stop 60 years of hate.

[Zman]

:sl:/Peace To All

Accept Reality When It Comes To Hamas

By Stacie L. PettyJohn
Monday, July 02, 2007
DailyStar

In response to the formation of an emergency Palestinian government, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice announced that Washington would remove the embargo on international aid for the Palestinian Authority.

Rice's decision appeared to be the start of a "West Bank first" policy which aims to strengthen Fatah and weaken Hamas by demonstrating the stark contrast between living conditions in the West Bank and those in Gaza.

While Palestinians living in the former would see their quality of life improve, those in the latter would continue to languish in isolation until they reject Hamas and support Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

This Strategy Is Destined To Fail.

In order to find a lasting solution to intra-Palestinian violence, not to mention the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the United States and Israel must accept that Hamas is a significant force in Palestinian politics, one which cannot be left out of the political process.

Despite recent events, Hamas' intentions are not entirely clear. At times, it has signaled it may be slowly coming to accept a two-state solution, but at others it displayed unabated radicalism. These mixed messages may reflect the fact that some of Hamas' leaders are moderating, and are engaged in a power struggle with hard-liners within the organization.

Certainly, the conquest of Gaza may be a prominent signal that the hard-liners have triumphed; however, the international community has not given the moderates within Hamas any incentives to cooperate.

Those who advocate arming Fatah and isolating Hamas have intimated that they are empowering the former to destroy the latter.

History provides us with two valuable lessons about this situation.

First, terrorist organizations only gradually forgo violence and commit to a political process.

Therefore, it is important to discover whether there are moderates within Hamas, and if this happens to be the case, to strengthen them.

To do so, the international community needs to end its policy of blanket isolationism, which only weakens the pragmatists, and adopt a policy of conditional engagement in order to promote cooperation.

Second, history also suggests that simply rejecting elected leaders in an effort to bolster more acceptable alternatives will only exacerbate the situation.

In 1981 Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin's government tried to limit the Palestine Liberation Organization's influence in the Occupied Territories by dismissing municipal officials and mayors sympathetic to the PLO, and by creating an alternative network of village leagues with a compliant leadership.

In an attempt to generate support for the village leaders, Israel then worked to improve living conditions throughout the territories.

This strategy backfired, however, increasing disorder in the Palestinian areas and enhancing the PLO's popularity.

Some might argue that a "West Bank first" policy can succeed where the village league initiative failed. In particular, the village leaders never had any popular support, owed their position to Israel, and were quickly accused of collaborating with the enemy. Today, Abbas has both legitimacy and a base of support as the president of the PA and chairman of the PLO.

However, despite all this, Abbas remains weak and does not even have full control over his own party.

Moreover, the members of the new emergency government have even less of a domestic following, which stands in contrast to the continuing support for Hamas.

Another difference between these two plans actually suggests that the "West Bank first" policy is even more likely to fail than the village league initiative.

Although the earlier Israeli effort aimed to improve conditions for all Palestinians, the current policy only rewards the West Bank and excludes Gaza.

If Fatah accepts preferential treatment for the West Bank, it will be vilified for abandoning its brethren in Gaza and further dividing the Palestinian territories.

Hamas has already accused Fatah of working for Israel.

If an effective separation plan is implemented, aspersions like these will proliferate, destroying what credibility Abbas still has.

A more viable strategy begins with Israel and the international community removing the pressure on Hamas and encouraging the creation of a new power-sharing agreement.

Palestinian unity is necessary to restore security in the territories, and to resurrect the peace process with Israel.

If excluded from official Palestinian decision-making, Hamas will almost certainly launch attacks against Israel in an effort to subvert negotiations, or to precipitate an Israeli crackdown in the West Bank.

Although the resumption of international aid to the PA is a positive move, the US should not use this incentive to further poison relations between Fatah and Hamas.

Given the present circumstances, Hamas' intentions must be tested by removing the sanctions and giving it a chance to act responsibly.

Hamas' behavior should then be judged by whether or not it imposes order in Gaza, ends the Qassam attacks against Israel, secures the release of hostages, institutes a comprehensive ceasefire, and eventually authorizes Abbas to negotiate with Israel.

If Hamas fails to reach these benchmarks, the international community will be justified in reinstituting a policy of isolation and pursuing negotiations with Abbas.

Ideological and physical divisions within Palestinian society make the current situation potentially explosive.

The PA has already lost control over Gaza, but there may be even more disastrous and far-reaching repercussions if a "West Bank first" policy is implemented.

In all likelihood, Abbas and Fatah will be permanently tainted by participating in a plan that intentionally excludes Gaza.

Additionally, Gazans may further radicalize, turning the strip into a haven for groups like Al-Qaeda, which make Hamas appear moderate by comparison.

If the international community wishes to stabilize the Palestinian territories and restart the peace process, it must help mend the split between Hamas and Fatah.

A policy of conditional engagement could induce moderates within Hamas to cooperate without first requiring the movement to undergo an unrealistic and sudden transformation.

The failure of this policy would provide the international community with a clearer picture of Hamas' intentions.

For the US and Israel, even indirectly dealing with Hamas is an unpalatable option.

Nevertheless, a policy of isolation and coercion has only led to increased violence and disorder.

Viewing the current situation as simply an opportunity to weaken Hamas will only compound earlier mistakes.

To avert more devastation, the international community needs to deal with reality.

Stacie L. PettyJohn is a research fellow in the Foreign Policy Studies Program at the Brookings Institution in Washington.

She wrote this commentary for THE DAILY STAR.

Source:
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article....ticle_id=83455

[Zman]

:sl:/Peace To All

Intel: Hamas Toned Down Terror Activity

By TOVAH LAZAROFF
Jul. 3, 2007 16:29
Updated Jul. 4, 2007 0:07
Jerusalem Post

Hamas has toned down its terrorist activities in Gaza but has allowed Islamic Jihad to continue firing rockets against civilian targets in the western Negev and to plan suicide bombings, a senior IDF officer told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Tuesday.

Col. Ronen Cohen, deputy head of Military Intelligence's Research Division, said Hamas has focused its anti-Israel activity on firing mortars, mostly at military targets along the Gaza border.

But he warned that Hamas had strengthened its military forces in Gaza and that its ability to transfer information, documents and money in and out of the Strip via Egypt would grow, even though the border with Sinai was currently closed.

Source:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull